Reasons why the NBA is not rigged

[RTran85]

All you simple minded people NBA is rigged because of the one and only entity LAS VEGAS!!!!!!!! They bookmakers runs the show.

[SpinninHouse]

The NBA systematically influences the out comes of games, period.

[GooniesNeverDie]

You're in denial....you're telling me that Draymond should have received a flagrant 1 foul on that play while Lebron just receives a technical??? If that exact same play had happened in game 6 with the series tied at 3 games a piece going back to the Oracle for a game 7, do you think the NBA would have suspended Draymond.....

Yes. After the second Adams nut kick, the NBA sat Draymond down like a kindergartner and told him the next time he hit a player in the junk, he was serving a suspension. And what did Draymond do? He hit another player in the junk and embarrassed the league.

I swear the Warriors are the Honey Boo Boo of the NBA. They do what they want and when they get a time out on the stairs, the entire world is out to get them.

You give him a technical and you fine him, you don't suspend him for a finals game in an attempt to completely change the series so you can increase your revenues.

Sent from my SM-G930T using RealGM mobile app

He was hitting people in the nuts left and right.. that's easily a flagrant foul. I don't get how people don't understand this. The nuts and the head are extremely dangerous areas to be hitting people and the stricter rules are neccessary to make sure people like Draymond don't screw up someone's life.

[MartinToVaught]

Good post OP.

One thing that has always been amusing to me - many people say that 2007 Suns/Spurs series was rigged, but why the hell would the NBA want the Spurs to win, if their TV ratings were always extremely low? Doesn't make sense from marketing standpoint. Suns played exciting, high-pace, offense-oriented basketball that a lot more people would like to watch.

The conspiracy theories about that series have always bugged me. The facts have never backed them up:

- As you said, the Spurs are the smaller market and the more "boring" team. There's no reason - financially or entertainment-wise - why the league would have rigged that series against the Suns.

- Nash admitted in an interview years later that he flopped on that infamous Horry play. He was hardly an innocent victim here.

- Horry was suspended two games for that play. Baron Davis wasn't suspended at all for a similar play he committed against Derek Fisher in the Warriors/Jazz series that year. Seems to me the Spurs were "screwed" a lot worse than the Suns.

- Everyone talks about the Horry play and Nash's busted-up nose from Game 1. Nobody remembers the black eye that Marion gave Manu in Game 3. It was just a physical series.

- Leaving the bench like Amar'e and Diaw did is against the rules. You can make the argument that the league shouldn't have impacted the series by suspending them, but consider the context. The league at the time was still trying to undo the lingering PR disaster brought on by the Malice at the Palace and the perception that all of its players were thugs and divas. For a few years back then, they cracked down harder than ever on emotional outbursts by players. IIRC, this was the same year that Duncan got ejected for laughing from the bench and Stephen Jackson got tossed IN THE PLAYOFFS for clapping. Amar'e and Diaw needed to understand how touchy the league was at the time and do a better job of controlling their emotions, period. Their selfishness and immaturity is what really hurt the Suns, not the league by suspending them.

- The Spurs simply owned the Suns back then. Even if all the refs were replaced by unbiased robots and nobody on either team got suspended, the Suns probably would have found a way to lose that series. Case in point: the Suns had homecourt and promptly choked in Game 1. Even without their suspended players, the Suns led by as much as 16 on their home court in Game 5 and still choked.

I understand why the 2002 Kings/Lakers series is still talked about, but 2007 Suns/Spurs? No way.

[Agenda42]

I don't think the NBA is rigged in the sense that it picks who is going to win each season or anything like that.

However, I thought the evidence for the NBA using officiating to extend series or keep games closer than they would otherwise be was pretty clear.
http://www.oregonlive.com/nba/index.ssf/2009/06/professors_nba_officating_stud.html
http://ostrowr.github.io/2014/12/11/fouls/
https://books.google.com/books?id=N1BjCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA225&lpg=PA225&source=bl&ots=GhqiInz_zl&sig=0jbPAu1HaiszzDpaN2gFM_xXRUg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiUhs3CobLNAhVBLmMKHW-kC884ChDoAQggMAE#v=onepage&q=nba%20referees%20team%20behind%20in%20series&f=false

I feel like the Warriors got quite friendly whistles starting in game 5 of the WCF, and the Cavs saw similar treatment in the Finals.

[davidfr94]

When a player is so abviously fouled that a 8 year old could call the foul and that a profesionnal nba referee does not actually call it, i just find it really strange.

And for the Green incident and the people that say the Warriors are just whinners (well sometimes they are but not on this one), I know that it is not the first Time he hit someone in the groin but maybe you should look at the replay one more Time and if you still think that his suspension has nothing to do with extending the series then ... Maybe you have a 8 year old brain.

[jbk1234]

What this thread has turned into:

[Brooklyn_34]

Down 8... Curry rips Kyrie... it was about to be a 6 point game.

CURRY WAS CALLED FOR A REACH!

Rigged.

That was a foul. I had to look at it a couple times.

Curry basically held Irving up by placing his left arm over Irving's shoulder and neck.

It didn't look like at it first, but they got the call correct.

[Hooplah]

What this thread has turned into:

Those academic studies deal more with human error and unconscious bias then outright conspiracy. Doesn't it at least seem incompetent when superstar players who never foul out receive 3 or more foul calls that weren't even close to being correct? Again, it's not just Curry, it happens to everyone, including Lebron.

[MrBigShot]

I kind of feel like there needs to be a separate argument on this issue. That is, on one hand, you have a group of conspiracy theorists who think that the NBA is actively involved in determining who will win the title and as such NBA is pretty much equivalent to WWE. I absolutely disagree with this group and I suspect that your post is more relayed towards them. In which case, we are united.

However, I am of the opinion that although the NBA is not rigged per se, the people who are involved with the NBA (e.g. commissioner, refs) are cognizant of which outcomes are good for the NBA and thus, their bias will fall along the most lucrative path for the NBA in a 50/50 situation. For example, everyone knows that the NBA would have preferred that the Cavs make this a series down 1-3 as opposed to the Warriors finishing the series in five games. Really, you would be naive to think that the NBA truly truly do not care about this kind of stuff at all. And accordingly, once the time comes upon deciding to suspend Draymond Green, these things all play a role in making the decision. And thus, I would think that it is conceivable that the NBA would not have suspended Green if the Warriors were down 1:3 to prolong the series but given that they were up 3:1, the decision to suspend Draymond became much easier.

I am not so sure if some of you are at these business meetings where these decisions are being made but profit for the company (in this case, the NBA) always factors in. Obviously, you do not want to give off a perception that you are WWE, but for a 50/50 call (e.g. decision to suspend Draymond), these things play a role. You would be completely naive to think that it doesn't.

Great post. I agree whole heartedly. The notion that the NBA is rigged to the extent that they are outright pre-determining who will win/lose has just isn't feasible, that idea has too many holes in it and too much is at stake. Imagine the back lash and legal action that would take place if any of the owners, each of which invested anywhere from hundreds of millions to billions of dollars into their franchises found out the NBA was doing that. It would be an absolute disaster. Then there are other variables like injuries, the fact that no player in existence can just suddenly decide which shots will go in, unexpected performances by role players ect...if the NBA was rigged there's absolutely zero chance that Tim Duncan, the most "boring" superstar ever as a lot of casual fans would describe him wins 5 championships.

Instead the NBA influences the game with the 50/50 situations you described where you can technically argue that they were justified one way or the other, and via things like superstar calls, rookie treatment, referees stalling their whistles at the end of games.

I don't think any reasonable person would dispute that the NBA wouldn't have suspended if the series was tied 2-2 or if they were down 1-3 instead of up 3-1 looking to eliminate Cleveland in 5 games. Of course, I think the suspension was warranted because of the rest of his record throughout the playoffs, but its undeniable that the league took into account records of the respective series (GS down 1-3, then Cleveland down 1-3) when they decided to suspend Draymond against Cleveland and not suspend him against OKC. I absolutely think they aim to extend series.

[SashAlex]

1. NBA decided to instate instant replay. If you are trying to rig games you don't implement instant replay which allows refs to correct mistakes and make sure the right decision is made when the game is on the line. If you are rigging a game you are better off not using instant replay and having "human error" as an excuse for biased officiating.
2. New CBA that was signed helps small markets be more competitive by increasing revenue sharing and allowing teams to re-sign players for an extra season as an incentive not to leave the team for a bigger market. If league wanted all their stars in big markets they wouldn't have made that rule. They also made the luxury tax super punitive to discourage big markets from over spending.
3. Adam Silver works for ALL 30 owners. Most owners are ultra competitive and would never allow their team to get screwed over deliberately by the commissioner. Adam Silver gets paid by the owners, he is not above them. They can fire him. There is no way someone like Mark Cuban would green light his team getting screwed over for the good of the game.
4. TV money is a fixed amount and guaranteed. The NBA just signed a 10 year tv deal. They get a certain amount regardless of how high or low the ratings are and don't renegotiate those tv rights for another decade. It doesnt matter if 5 million or 20 million people watch game 7 the league gets paid a fixed amount regardless.
5. NBA draft lottery is taped and shown on nba.com and has a representative from each team monitoring it. Yet all its going to take is the Lakers to win it once and all of a sudden "the NBA is rigged" nutjobs will start conspiracy theories. In the NHL the Edmonton Oilers won the lottery three times recently. Had it been a big market team that won it everyone would say its rigged...but conveniently ignore it when small markets win the lotttery.
6. Fans of all 30 teams complain about officiating and think the game is rigged against their team...its never the opponent getting screwed, its only their team. What a coincidence.
7. There are a lot of 50/50 calls in basketball and refs have to make a split second decision. Superstars, home teams and veterans usually get the benefit of the doubt, it doesn't mean Adam Silver instructed the refs to cheat. Deal with it.

I'm not american, but I believe you're one of those guys that goes voting for clowns like Trump thinking it could really change something.

[Sark]

When a player is so abviously fouled that a 8 year old could call the foul and that a profesionnal nba referee does not actually call it, i just find it really strange.

And for the Green incident and the people that say the Warriors are just whinners (well sometimes they are but not on this one), I know that it is not the first Time he hit someone in the groin but maybe you should look at the replay one more Time and if you still think that his suspension has nothing to do with extending the series then ... Maybe you have a 8 year old brain.

The suspension was not because of the actual hit to Lebron. The suspension was for all the other flagrant fouls throughout all the other playoff games he was in, and this last one put him over the limit.

If Green weren't a moron, he'd know how many flagrants he had, and wouldn't have committed another one.

[jbk1234]

What this thread has turned into:

Those academic studies deal more with human error and unconscious bias then outright conspiracy. Doesn't it at least seem incompetent when superstar players who never foul out receive 3 or more fouls that weren't even close to being fouls? Again, it's not just Curry, it happens to everyone, including Lebron.

We have a different definition of "not even close to being fouls." By the rule book, they were fouls. All of them. On two of the soft calls, he gets away with the initial contact and kept going back to the well.

What's missing from all the nonsense is a look at entire game. The Cavs picked up their first foul 15 seconds into the game on a moving screen. Love was the victim of multiple soft calls. Curry went to the free throw line three trips in a row in the third quarter on soft calls. So they were calling the game tight and Curry didn't adjust.

But what's really telling to me, is that Curry kept gambling even though he was in foul trouble. If you've got 4 fouls, why are you riding Kyrie at the top of the three point line and repeatedly reaching across his body with you right hand while your left hand is on his shoulder? From middle school on, you're taught that you're going to catch a whistle on that play.

He kicks his legs out that three point shot and got away with a no call instead of an offensive foul.

He's trying to get the charge on LBJ and doesn't get their in time.

He's reaches in on that back court play, makes contact on the arm, they don't call it, and then he runs into LBJ after LBJ secure possession (that would have been a play on for me but it's a foul).

There were several reaches/grabs on Kyrie that weren't called as well.

From my perspective it's the Green thing all over again. After the second Adams' play, the NBA told him one more shot to the nuts and you're suspended. He did it anyway. Curry's in foul trouble and he's gambling - over and over again because he doesn't think the officials have the balls to foul him out. Guess what - he's special but he's not that special.

[Peregrine01]

What this thread has turned into:

Those academic studies deal more with human error and unconscious bias then outright conspiracy. Doesn't it at least seem incompetent when superstar players who never foul out receive 3 or more fouls that weren't even close to being fouls? Again, it's not just Curry, it happens to everyone, including Lebron.

We have a different definition of "not even close to being fouls." By the rule book, they were fouls. All of them. On two of the soft calls, he gets away with the initial contact and kept going back to the well.

What's missing from all the nonsense is a look at entire game. The Cavs picked up their first foul 15 seconds into the game on a moving screen. Love was the victim of multiple soft calls. Curry went to the free throw line three trips in a row in the third quarter on soft calls. So they were calling the game tight and Curry didn't adjust.

But what's really telling to me, is that Curry kept gambling even though he was in foul trouble. If you've got 4 fouls, why are you riding Kyrie at the top of the three point line and repeatedly reaching across his body with you right hand while your left hand is on his shoulder? From middle school on, you're taught that you're going to catch a whistle on that play.

He kicks his legs out that three point shot and got away with a no call instead of an offensive foul.

He's trying to get the charge on LBJ and doesn't get their in time.

He's reaches in on that back court play, makes contact on the arm, they don't call it, and then he runs into LBJ after LBJ secure possession (that would have been a play on for me but it's a foul).

There were several reaches/grabs on Kyrie that weren't called as well.

From my perspective it's the Green thing all over again. After the second Adams' play, the NBA told him one more shot to the nuts and you're suspended. He did it anyway. Curry's in foul trouble and he's gambling - over and over again because he doesn't think the officials have the balls to foul him out. Guess what - he's special but he's not that special.

This is a wall of text that nobody needs to read.

Just lol at you going into every thread trying to justify that those weren't horrid calls on Curry. It probably wouldn't have affected the outcome but to any neutral observer of the game, they were horrid calls.

[jbk1234]

Those academic studies deal more with human error and unconscious bias then outright conspiracy. Doesn't it at least seem incompetent when superstar players who never foul out receive 3 or more fouls that weren't even close to being fouls? Again, it's not just Curry, it happens to everyone, including Lebron.

We have a different definition of "not even close to being fouls." By the rule book, they were fouls. All of them. On two of the soft calls, he gets away with the initial contact and kept going back to the well.

What's missing from all the nonsense is a look at entire game. The Cavs picked up their first foul 15 seconds into the game on a moving screen. Love was the victim of multiple soft calls. Curry went to the free throw line three trips in a row in the third quarter on soft calls. So they were calling the game tight and Curry didn't adjust.

But what's really telling to me, is that Curry kept gambling even though he was in foul trouble. If you've got 4 fouls, why are you riding Kyrie at the top of the three point line and repeatedly reaching across his body with you right hand while your left hand is on his shoulder? From middle school on, you're taught that you're going to catch a whistle on that play.

He kicks his legs out that three point shot and got away with a no call instead of an offensive foul.

He's trying to get the charge on LBJ and doesn't get their in time.

He's reaches in on that back court play, makes contact on the arm, they don't call it, and then he runs into LBJ after LBJ secure possession (that would have been a play on for me but it's a foul).

There were several reaches/grabs on Kyrie that weren't called as well.

From my perspective it's the Green thing all over again. After the second Adams' play, the NBA told him one more shot to the nuts and you're suspended. He did it anyway. Curry's in foul trouble and he's gambling - over and over again because he doesn't think the officials have the balls to foul him out. Guess what - he's special but he's not that special.

This is a wall of text that nobody needs to read.

Just lol at you going into every thread trying to justify that those weren't horrid calls on Curry. It probably wouldn't have affected the outcome but to any neutral observer of the game, they were horrid calls.

If you don't feel the need to read it, why do you feel the need to respond? Go ahead and bounce.

[Hooplah]

There were several reaches/grabs on Kyrie that weren't called as well.

From my perspective it's the Green thing all over again. After the second Adams' play, the NBA told him one more shot to the nuts and you're suspended. He did it anyway. Curry's in foul trouble and he's gambling - over and over again because he doesn't think the officials have the balls to foul him out. Guess what - he's special but he's not that special.

Or Curry's used to being reffed a certain way. You don't seem very fond of him though, so tell me how many of these fouls on Lebron were actually legit:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJsdQazLi0c[/youtube]

[Peregrine01]

We have a different definition of "not even close to being fouls." By the rule book, they were fouls. All of them. On two of the soft calls, he gets away with the initial contact and kept going back to the well.

What's missing from all the nonsense is a look at entire game. The Cavs picked up their first foul 15 seconds into the game on a moving screen. Love was the victim of multiple soft calls. Curry went to the free throw line three trips in a row in the third quarter on soft calls. So they were calling the game tight and Curry didn't adjust.

But what's really telling to me, is that Curry kept gambling even though he was in foul trouble. If you've got 4 fouls, why are you riding Kyrie at the top of the three point line and repeatedly reaching across his body with you right hand while your left hand is on his shoulder? From middle school on, you're taught that you're going to catch a whistle on that play.

He kicks his legs out that three point shot and got away with a no call instead of an offensive foul.

He's trying to get the charge on LBJ and doesn't get their in time.

He's reaches in on that back court play, makes contact on the arm, they don't call it, and then he runs into LBJ after LBJ secure possession (that would have been a play on for me but it's a foul).

There were several reaches/grabs on Kyrie that weren't called as well.

From my perspective it's the Green thing all over again. After the second Adams' play, the NBA told him one more shot to the nuts and you're suspended. He did it anyway. Curry's in foul trouble and he's gambling - over and over again because he doesn't think the officials have the balls to foul him out. Guess what - he's special but he's not that special.

This is a wall of text that nobody needs to read.

Just lol at you going into every thread trying to justify that those weren't horrid calls on Curry. It probably wouldn't have affected the outcome but to any neutral observer of the game, they were horrid calls.

If you don't feel the need to read it, why do you feel the need to respond? Go ahead and bounce.

I didn't read the whole thing. I saw a couple combinations of words and immediately dismissed it for homerism. Frankly, all your time spent posting in these kinds of threads will not change the opinion of the unbiased observer one iota.

[jbk1234]

There were several reaches/grabs on Kyrie that weren't called as well.

From my perspective it's the Green thing all over again. After the second Adams' play, the NBA told him one more shot to the nuts and you're suspended. He did it anyway. Curry's in foul trouble and he's gambling - over and over again because he doesn't think the officials have the balls to foul him out. Guess what - he's special but he's not that special.

Or Curry's used to being reffed a certain way. You don't seem very fond of him though, so tell me how many of these fouls on Lebron were actually legit:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJsdQazLi0c[/youtube]

I don't know what a game from years ago in a different series has to do with Thursday night's game.

Several times the Warriors went on a run and the Cavs answered. Several times the Warriors got it down to 8 or 9 points and the Cavs responded by pushing it out to double digits. GS couldn't get stops and Curry started gambling. I really don't think it's more complicated than that.

[Hooplah]

I don't know what a game from years ago in a different series has to do with Thursday night's game.

Several times the Warriors went on a run and the Cavs answered. Several times the Warriors got it down to 8 or 9 points and the Cavs responded by pushing it out to double digits. GS couldn't get stops and Curry started gambling. I really don't think it's more complicated than that.

It's one of the rare examples of Lebron getting 5 fouls. Academic studies suggest refs are biased towards the losing team, especially in elimination games. Lebron received those 5 fouls up 3-1 in the Eastern Conference finals. The point is that Curry didn't have to worry about fouls as much down 3-1 to the Thunder as he had to up 3-1 in the Finals.

[mulamutti]

NBA is likely not rigged in any big way. There is no real point. If Ayesha Curry is blurting it out, clearly steph doesnt seem to be in it. So the only mechanism to rig it would be the draft and the refs. Well apart from a few obvious picks like lebron or duncan, what would be the point of rigging the draft. the NBA doesn't have any magic lenses to assess a player to give decide which team should get which player. They have no idea, just like anyone else, if a player is gonna pan out. So what's the damn point of rigging it so one team gets an edge. On average, that's a dumb thing to do.

With refs, its unlikely they show slow motion replays, and institute 2 minute reports that make them look stupid, when they're trying to rig it. Like in all walks of life, the children on this board will figure out, that purposeful crime or fraud is considerably less likely than old fashioned incompetence. The nba is not rigged. its just that the refs are not perfect.